A Closer Look at the SFUSD Budget

Administration Spending in Percentages

Another way to look at administration spending is to do so using percentages in comparison to revenue.

District

Total Revenue

Administration Expenditures

% of Revenue

San Francisco Unified

$10,473

$462

4.41%

Capistrano Unified

$7,954

$314

3.95%

San Bernardino City Unified

$10,007

$431

4.31%

Santa Ana Unified

$9,236

$374

4.05%

Elk Grove Unified

$8,203

$429

5.23%

This comparison shows that Elk Grove has the highest percentage in comparison to revenue, but SFUSD still comes in second. However, using percentages obscures the amount of money actually involved.

Even though 0.1% of the budget may equal roughly $10.47 per student, with a population of roughly 50,000 students the total amount of money we are discussing is ~$525,000. If administration expenditures were reduced to 4% of revenue, the number is larger that $2 million. That amount is certainly not large enough to make up for the $56 million budget shortfall, but it’s certainly worth examining.

Like this:

Related

7 Responses

This is a great point, but I am betting it is due to cost of living adjustments. I would be certain that teacher salaries are also taking up a larger percentage than similar districts because the cost of living is so much higher here. It wouldn’t be fair to keep them in line with lower cost of living districts.

Actually, our average teacher salaries are substantially less than comparable districts. Our average teacher salary is $59,448. The next closest is $67k and with the other three districts in the mid 70s. These stats are pre Prop A, but the other districts may have had similar propositions or new contracts. I think we have a less experienced teaching staff… the cost of living in fact drives teachers out of SF rather than pads their pay checks. (See the pdf in SFUSD expenses post Feb 17).

And I agree, it’s not fair for teacher pay to not reflect of the cost of living.

sfbudgetblog is correct, pre Prop A SFUSD average teacher salaries were about $10K per year LESS than surrounding districts (with equally high COL.) Prop A was designed to change that to at least make starting teachers in line with our neighboring districts.

But I don’t think this chart really shows that SFUSD is out of line – I recall that the average Admin % for most California districts is 6%. We are still way below the average.

And don’t forget what goes into Administrative expenses – it’s ALL central office spending (like special education teachers that are at school sites, custodians, health programs, etc.)

I’d love to see a better chart from SFUSD that shows this.

I found the best info on this from Jill Tucker on SFGATE – Here it is from City Insider (I’ve included comments, too):

Raise your hand if you’re a pencil pusher, please

With the school district facing a $113 million deficit and Superintendent Carlos Garcia calling for labor unions to give serious concessions to close the gap, there have been increasingly loud demands to cut the district’s central office instead of schools or teachers.

Sounds reasonable. But just what is central office? We decided to peruse the district’s 445-page budget to see. By strict definition there are 750 people working in the “central administration.”

zenithgallery.com

Somebody has got to go.

What? 750? Given the district has about 3,000 teachers, 750 sure sounds like a lot of pencil pushers, right? Well, not exactly.

Here’s how those positions break down:

— 107 people in the central office, costing $15.7 million, have jobs that range from the superintendent, to accounting, benefits, human resources, public outreach and board support staff. That’s just shy of 4 percent of the operating budget. (See the budget’s nifty pie chart on page 46.)

— 81 people costing $9.5 million for other central administration/student support service folks, including the special education department, translation services, school health, and attendance accounting. (See page 47)

The Office

Sorry, Dwight. Pink slip’s in the mail.

— And finally, the big-ticket category: 519 people costing $55.3 million. This central office group includes 303 district-wide custodians, 52 IT folks, 100 security personnel, the facilities department, purchasing, payroll, and other categories. Regardless of where they actually work, they are paid out of the central administration.(See page 48)

That means well over half those 750 central positions are either custodians keeping schools clean, security workers keeping schools safe or IT workers trying to keep the district’s thousands of computers running. Others are cutting paychecks, hiring teachers, assigning kids to schools and assessing children with special needs.

So, who or what do you want to cut to get the district back in the black?

From February through May, the district will be holding public forums to get feedback on how to close the $113 million shortfall, with the final budget going to the board in June. We’ll let you know where and when.

Why should the Board have FTEs? Exactly how much does this cost? In my personal experience, most major corporations have, at most, two or three employees in Investor Relations and only one who supports the Board (and usually the CEO as well). This latter individual also functions as Corporate Secretary and is responsible for the seal and Board minutes along with any filings. Oftentimes there are multiple corporations meshed into the single public-facing corporation. What support and data the board needs can be collected from other department heads.

Why are benefits separate from HR? Why is payroll separate from HR? Why is attendance accounting separate from HR?

Sounds like there could be some consolidation in the overhead.

Recommend: (5)(2)[Report Abuse]Permalink
candl1/28/2010 5:21:04 PM
Did anyone notice that those “519 people costing $55.3 million.” works out to…

$106551 /yr average in salary?!?!?!?

Thats more money than many of my ex-coworkers make as professionals (SW Developers, IT, Project Managers, etc) in the Silicon Valley! And these are JANITORS and SECURITY GUARDS!

Janitors should be making $35K tops; same for security… and basic IT (Help Desk, Net Ops, etc) should be making 50K to 70K tops. Sounds like at least 20 million could be saved here.

I have to side with the teachers here. The times when city employees irk out 100K+/yr cushy jobs at the expense of taxpayers, kids and old people is coming to an end…

Recommend: (8)(5)[Report Abuse]Permalink
jilltucker1/29/2010 12:45:16 PM
Jill Tucker the reporter here: To be more clear, those budget figures include all costs for those departments, including supplies, benefits etc., not just salaries.

It is $106,551 in salary/benefits and overhead costs as Ms. Tucker reports. In the companies I have worked for, the full cost of an employee is about 2.5x their annual salary. This equates to an average salary not of $100k but of $42,000. I’d say that’s pretty reasonable for janitorial, IT, and other support services, no?

From City Insider/Jill Tucker/SF Chronicle
(and the best info on t his I’ve seen yet – would love more info like this directly from SFUSD)

Raise your hand if you’re a pencil pusher, please

With the school district facing a $113 million deficit and Superintendent Carlos Garcia calling for labor unions to give serious concessions to close the gap, there have been increasingly loud demands to cut the district’s central office instead of schools or teachers.

Sounds reasonable. But just what is central office? We decided to peruse the district’s 445-page budget to see. By strict definition there are 750 people working in the “central administration.”

zenithgallery.com

Somebody has got to go.

What? 750? Given the district has about 3,000 teachers, 750 sure sounds like a lot of pencil pushers, right? Well, not exactly.

Here’s how those positions break down:

— 107 people in the central office, costing $15.7 million, have jobs that range from the superintendent, to accounting, benefits, human resources, public outreach and board support staff. That’s just shy of 4 percent of the operating budget. (See the budget’s nifty pie chart on page 46.)

— 81 people costing $9.5 million for other central administration/student support service folks, including the special education department, translation services, school health, and attendance accounting. (See page 47)

The Office

Sorry, Dwight. Pink slip’s in the mail.

— And finally, the big-ticket category: 519 people costing $55.3 million. This central office group includes 303 district-wide custodians, 52 IT folks, 100 security personnel, the facilities department, purchasing, payroll, and other categories. Regardless of where they actually work, they are paid out of the central administration.(See page 48)

That means well over half those 750 central positions are either custodians keeping schools clean, security workers keeping schools safe or IT workers trying to keep the district’s thousands of computers running. Others are cutting paychecks, hiring teachers, assigning kids to schools and assessing children with special needs.

So, who or what do you want to cut to get the district back in the black?

From February through May, the district will be holding public forums to get feedback on how to close the $113 million shortfall, with the final budget going to the board in June. We’ll let you know where and when.

Why should the Board have FTEs? Exactly how much does this cost? In my personal experience, most major corporations have, at most, two or three employees in Investor Relations and only one who supports the Board (and usually the CEO as well). This latter individual also functions as Corporate Secretary and is responsible for the seal and Board minutes along with any filings. Oftentimes there are multiple corporations meshed into the single public-facing corporation. What support and data the board needs can be collected from other department heads.

Why are benefits separate from HR? Why is payroll separate from HR? Why is attendance accounting separate from HR?

Sounds like there could be some consolidation in the overhead.

Recommend: (5)(2)[Report Abuse]Permalink
candl1/28/2010 5:21:04 PM
Did anyone notice that those “519 people costing $55.3 million.” works out to…

$106551 /yr average in salary?!?!?!?

Thats more money than many of my ex-coworkers make as professionals (SW Developers, IT, Project Managers, etc) in the Silicon Valley! And these are JANITORS and SECURITY GUARDS!

Janitors should be making $35K tops; same for security… and basic IT (Help Desk, Net Ops, etc) should be making 50K to 70K tops. Sounds like at least 20 million could be saved here.

I have to side with the teachers here. The times when city employees irk out 100K+/yr cushy jobs at the expense of taxpayers, kids and old people is coming to an end…

Recommend: (8)(5)[Report Abuse]Permalink
jilltucker1/29/2010 12:45:16 PM
Jill Tucker the reporter here: To be more clear, those budget figures include all costs for those departments, including supplies, benefits etc., not just salaries.

It is $106,551 in salary/benefits and overhead costs as Ms. Tucker reports. In the companies I have worked for, the full cost of an employee is about 2.5x their annual salary. This equates to an average salary not of $100k but of $42,000. I’d say that’s pretty reasonable for janitorial, IT, and other support services, no?

There is not a voice, a force, a department etc. within the district that will really get involved in speaking up to make a case in a debate like this. There would have to be some offshoot of the public information department that worked on researching and providing responses to misconceptions being tossed around in public discussion — rapidly and nimbly, too. But guess what — if there was such a staffer or department, it would be a Central Office expense!

Isn’t that Superintendent Garcia, and Deputy Supe. Lee and school boards job to explain and defend the budget? Garcia spoke directly to many of the arguments we’re making by incorrectly implying there is a problem with our numbers due to SF being both a county and school district. Lee simply said that district cuts would “absolutely affect classrooms.” Unfortunately with all the time he had to address the board and the public he provided no more details on how central office cuts would have a greater effect on student education than the furlough days and laid off teachers he proposes.

I’ve also heard that the comparisons to other districts are not valid because they have separate county offices of education, while ours is both the district and the county, all in the one budget. Unfortunately, I don’t know enough to engage in informed discussion about it — can you clarify why that’s NOT the case, though?